Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

"Half our enforcement is on cyclists", say Met Cycle Safety team; Wiggins on Brailsford cancer diagnosis; Netflix while driving; Cyclist killed trying to escape magpieattack; 25,000 protesters block Frankfurt car show +more in the Live Blog

All today's news from the site and beyond as we start a new week.....
16 September 2019, 16:40
Sensible place to wear a helmet, there doesn't seem to be too much headroom there ...
16 September 2019, 16:08
40th birthday beer brewed for Bristol & Bath Railway Path

A limited edition beer is being brewed to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Bristol & Bath Railway Path.

The pale ale, called Route 4, is a collaboration between Sustrans, which developed the route as its first major infrastructure project, and Bath Brew House, and will be on sale there from 5 October.

Route_4_Beer_-_James_Cleeton_and_Max_Cadman1

Last week, James Cleeton, Sustrans England Director South, helped weigh out the ingredients and mix the mash for the brew, with 20p from every bottle sold at the Bath Brew House benefiting the charity.

“The Bristol and Bath Railway Path is a true community asset, loved by so many people,” he said. “Its development came about through grassroots action, and we’re dedicated to working with the community to maintain and enhance this green and biodiverse corridor for the benefit of current users and future generations.

“The £1.1 million Department for Transport funding we announced last week will enable us to do this.

“Developing this limited edition beer with The Bath Brew House is something fun we’ve been able to do to celebrate the path. I’m looking forward to sampling a pint when we launch it in October.”

Bath Brew House head brewer Max Cadman added: “I regularly use the Bristol and Bath Railway Path to commute from Bristol to Bath and am really grateful for having such an enjoyable way to get to work. It’s also a popular tourist attraction and we see many people in the pub who have been out enjoying the path for leisure.

Route_4_Beer_-_James_Cleeton_and_Max_Cadman2

“One day I was riding along the path and it struck me that I could help celebrate and promote the path to others by creating a beer in its honour. The 40th anniversary celebrations were just the excuse we needed to get the process started.”

16 September 2019, 15:37
Met Police Cycle Safety Team say half their enforcement is on cyclists in tweet

The Met Police Cycle Safety team have had their use of resources called into question, after they posted a tweet saying two officers had spent today dealing with cyclists going the wrong way down Beeston Place in central London. They also said in the thread that half of their enforcement is against cyclists, which led to further criticism... 

Do you think such enforcement is necessary, or wholly disproportionate? 

16 September 2019, 15:10
Vintage bike restorer opens pop-up shop in Edinburgh

An Edinburgh business that restores vintage and classic bikes has opened a pop-up shop in the city’s Stockbridge district.

Velow Bikeworks, which is based in Portobello, will be trading for the rest of September at Seventeen, 17 St Stephen Street.

The business restores and sells bikes from the 1950s through to the 1990s and founder Walter Hamilton told Edinburgh Live: "I got bitten by the cycling bug in 2013 and wanted to learn some basic bike maintenance skills.

“So I rescued an old steel bicycle that was bound for the bin, took it apart, cleaned it up and put it all back together.

"I soon realised that there was something very satisfying about bringing a discarded bike back to life and the idea for Velow was born.

“There's something very pleasing about classic steel bicycles both aesthetically and functionally.

"It's true that they don't make them like they used to and the bikes I bring back to life are not only nice to look at but great fun to ride and have so much life left in them.

“It's incredibly satisfying knowing that I'm keeping old bikes on the road and helping to get more and more people riding bikes."

16 September 2019, 14:18
16 September 2019, 14:17
Wiggins: Brailsford cancer diagnosis puts life into perspective

Sir Bradley Wiggins says that Sir Dave Brailsford’s cancer diagnosis puts life into perspective.

The Team Ineos principal revealed in an interview with the Times published on Friday that he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer before the Tour de France and last month underwent a five-hour operation. He was due to receive the results of the operation last Saturday.

Sir Dave Brailsford at Team Ineos launch (picture credit SWPix.com (26)

Wiggins, who rode under Brailsford for Great Britain and was then recruited by him when Team Sky was set up in late 2009 said on his Eurosport podcast: "I've known Dave since I was 18.

“We've had an up and down [relationship], but one thing I've always considered is Dave as like a big brother to me. Someone you can have an argument or a fight with, fall out with - at times frustrating, at times we probably disliked each other, but I spoke to him at the Tour and he was very reflective and we had quite a nice moment actually.

"It puts things into perspective really, it just shows how delicate life is. We all wish him well. What he has done for this sport the last 10 years will never be fully appreciated,” Wiggins added.

"He has single-handedly made British cycling one of the biggest cycling nations in the world. His vision and drive has single handedly, I would go so far as to say, been the main reason behind the success of the sport in this country."

16 September 2019, 13:12
Owain Doull to partner Mark Cavendish at Six Day London

Olympic team pursuit champion Owain Doull, who yesterday completed his maiden Grand Tour as the Vuelta finished in Madrid, will next month partner Mark Cavendish at Six Day London.

The event takes place at the Lee Valley VeloPark from 22-27 October, and tickets are available here.

Doull said: “I can’t wait to race alongside Mark at Phynova Six Day London, he’s a British cycling legend and I’m sure we’ll perform well together. I’ve heard great things about Six Day and will be determined to bring it home for Wales under the lights.”

Other riders confirmed include Lotto-Soudal’s Caleb Ewan, winner of three stages at the Tour de France in July, and Deceuninck-Quick Step’s Elia Viviani, who beat Cavendish to Olympic gold at Rio 2016.

16 September 2019, 12:54
Bloody cyclists, helping a sporting legend back into her chair
16 September 2019, 11:48
"But no one uses the cycle lanes"...
16 September 2019, 12:06
Welsh rugby legend Gareth Thomas completes Ironman Wales

In a traumatic week for 45-year-old Thomas - who this week revealed that he is living with HIV after claiming that blackmailers threatened to expose his condition with his consent - he also smashed the notoriously tough Ironman Wales triathlon yesterday in a very impressive time of 12 hours, 18 minutes and 29 seconds. 

The course begins with a choppy 2.4 mile sea swim in Tenby and is known for its tough bike and run courses, with well over 2,000m of elevation on the 112 mile cycle. Riding a regular road bike with drop bars, Thomas completed it in an impressive 6:18:50 before completing the marathon segment in 4:17:49. 

16 September 2019, 10:49
A reported 25,000 people turned up to protest Frankfurt's IAA car show yesterday, with cyclists blocking the entrance

Sand im Getriebe, an environmental protest group, say an estimated 25,000 people turned out to protest against the German car industry at the International Motor Show in Frankfurt at the weekend, with protestors on bikes blocking the entrance on masse. With sales of large cars such as SUVs on the rise in Germany, Sand im Getriebe say on their website they are demonstrating against the damage caused to the environment by motor vehicles, and are campaigning for "car-free cities, more space for walking and cycling as well as developed and free public transport." 

The Frankfurt car show blockage was the latest in a number of protests that have taken place in Germany recently against pollution and the damage to the environment/danger posed by large vehicles such as SUVs. Berlin mayor Stephan von Dassel recently tweeted that "such tank-like vehicles (SUVs) have no place on our streets" after a driver ploughed into a crowd of pedestrians, killing four. It's also been reported that anarchists have been burning luxury SUVs around Berlin in protest. 

16 September 2019, 10:01
You've heard of mobile phones at the wheel. Now get ready for...

Words fail us. The cyclist who posted the photos to Twitter, who also happens to be the UK editor of YouGov, said he didn't get the number plate of the driver, but her face is pretty clear to see. 

16 September 2019, 08:03
Australian man dies in bike crash after trying to escape from swooping magpie attack

A 76-year-old man has died in Wollongong, New South Wales after veering off a path and crashing his bike while trying to avoid an attack from a swooping magpie. Wollongong Police said the man crashed into a fence post and suffered serious head injuries as a result. He was airlifted to St. George Hospital in Sydney and died later yesterday evening. 

Magpie attacks on pedestrians and cyclists have become notorious in Australia, particularly around springtime in September and October when the birds become more territorial to protect their young. After a spate of magpie attacks in August due to an early spring back in 2016, a behavioural ecologist said magpies could actually remember their victims if they think that person is a threat. 

Cyclists have been known to take precautions by attaching cable ties to their helmet pointing up vertically to stop magpies from getting their claws inside helmet vents. CNN report that there have already been 1,570 reported 'swoopings' already in 2019, with 189 resulting in injuries; incidents very rarely have fatal consequences.  

While magpies are a protected species and it's illegal to kill them, local authorities will act if one is particularly aggressive. Earlier this month, Hills Shire council shot a bird after receiving 40 complaints about it in three years.  

16 September 2019, 07:53
This has been coming for Primoz Roglic

Looking at these results together, the Slovenian was well overdue a Grand Tour win with that consistency over the last year and a half. Needless to say, the celebrations began last night after the victory was sealed...

16 September 2019, 07:48
Ask Matt anything with Bradley Wiggins

Eurosport's popular Vuelta segment saw Wiggo and Matt Stephens ponder life's great questions such as... which one is bigger, a Jumbo Visma or a Sunweb? Flake or Twirl? 

Arriving at road.cc in 2017 via 220 Triathlon Magazine, Jack dipped his toe in most jobs on the site and over at eBikeTips before being named the new editor of road.cc in 2020, much to his surprise. His cycling life began during his students days, when he cobbled together a few hundred quid off the back of a hard winter selling hats (long story) and bought his first road bike - a Trek 1.1 that was quickly relegated to winter steed, before it was sadly pinched a few years later. Creatively replacing it with a Trek 1.2, Jack mostly rides this bike around local cycle paths nowadays, but when he wants to get the racer out and be competitive his preferred events are time trials, sportives, triathlons and pogo sticking - the latter being another long story.  

Add new comment

35 comments

Avatar
cycle.london | 4 years ago
0 likes

Sadly, it is now legal to use your iPad to watch a TV show or a film, when you're driving, since the case where the bloke got off after being nicked filming a car crash.

Avatar
quiff replied to cycle.london | 4 years ago
0 likes
cycle.london wrote:

Sadly, it is now legal to use your iPad to watch a TV show or a film, when you're driving, since the case where the bloke got off after being nicked filming a car crash.

Only, I would argue, if the content is stored on the device. If you are streaming it, then you are using the device for an "interactive communication function" within the meaning of the law and so it is illegal. Either way, you're still open to a dangerous driving charge. As the court said in the Barreto case you refer to: "It should not be thought that this is a green light for people to make films as they drive. As I have already said, driving while filming events or taking photographs whether with a separate camera or with the camera on a phone, may be cogent evidence of careless driving, and possibly of dangerous driving. It is criminal conduct which may be prosecuted and on conviction may result in the imposition of penalties significantly more serious than those which flow from breach of the regulations. The same applies to any other use of the phone while driving."      

Avatar
cycle.london replied to quiff | 4 years ago
1 like
quiff wrote:
cycle.london wrote:

Sadly, it is now legal to use your iPad to watch a TV show or a film, when you're driving, since the case where the bloke got off after being nicked filming a car crash.

Only, I would argue, if the content is stored on the device. If you are streaming it, then you are using the device for an "interactive communication function" within the meaning of the law and so it is illegal. Either way, you're still open to a dangerous driving charge. As the court said in the Barreto case you refer to: "It should not be thought that this is a green light for people to make films as they drive. As I have already said, driving while filming events or taking photographs whether with a separate camera or with the camera on a phone, may be cogent evidence of careless driving, and possibly of dangerous driving. It is criminal conduct which may be prosecuted and on conviction may result in the imposition of penalties significantly more serious than those which flow from breach of the regulations. The same applies to any other use of the phone while driving."      

yeah, you're probably right.  I reported a bloke a fortnight ago, and plod couldn't get him for anything but 'not being in proper control' or whatever.

Avatar
TriTaxMan | 4 years ago
0 likes

Sorry I am lost here.... why are people complaining that the police are stopping cyclists for breaking the law?

If I am driving my car and see someone driving like a bell end, and to see them get stopped by the police nothing makes me happier.... because something is getting done about it.

If I am on my bike and I see someone cycling like a bell end nothing would make me happier than to see them get stopped by the police.

As a group we cannot call for more policing against cars because they do more damage than cylists.  Police should enforce the laws of the road regardless of the mode of transport.  Expecting special treatment for law breaking cyclists is sheer hipocrisy.

It is like turning round and saying nothing should be done about people allowing their dogs to s#*t in parks or on the street, because who is that hurting?  Or nothing should be done about people fly tipping, or throwing litter away, that doesn't hurt anyone?  No?

If you break the law and get caught you only have one person to blame.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to TriTaxMan | 4 years ago
3 likes
craigstitt wrote:

Sorry I am lost here.... why are people complaining that the police are stopping cyclists for breaking the law?

If I am driving my car and see someone driving like a bell end, and to see them get stopped by the police nothing makes me happier.... because something is getting done about it.

If I am on my bike and I see someone cycling like a bell end nothing would make me happier than to see them get stopped by the police.

As a group we cannot call for more policing against cars because they do more damage than cylists.  Police should enforce the laws of the road regardless of the mode of transport.  Expecting special treatment for law breaking cyclists is sheer hipocrisy.

It is like turning round and saying nothing should be done about people allowing their dogs to s#*t in parks or on the street, because who is that hurting?  Or nothing should be done about people fly tipping, or throwing litter away, that doesn't hurt anyone?  No?

If you break the law and get caught you only have one person to blame.

The problem that a lot of us are having is the proportion of resources. You would expect police to allocate more resources for the more numerous and higher impact crimes e.g. to have the same number of police enforcing the copyright infringement of singing 'Happy Birthday' in public as to enforcing house burglaries would be seen as mis-management of police time.

As cyclists are far less numerous than cars, you'd expect them to put about 50 times more resources into policing motor vehicles just from the numbers alone. When you also look at the harm to society, you'd want even more resources to be spent on motor vehicles versus bikes, skateboards, electric scooters, horses, roller-blades etc.

The other aspect to consider is that most 'bell-end' cyclists are mainly putting themselves at risk whereas 'bell-end' drivers are mainly putting others at risk. I know which crimes that I'd rather have more police resources used for.

Avatar
TriTaxMan replied to hawkinspeter | 4 years ago
0 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

The problem that a lot of us are having is the proportion of resources. You would expect police to allocate more resources for the more numerous and higher impact crimes e.g. to have the same number of police enforcing the copyright infringement of singing 'Happy Birthday' in public as to enforcing house burglaries would be seen as mis-management of police time.

As cyclists are far less numerous than cars, you'd expect them to put about 50 times more resources into policing motor vehicles just from the numbers alone. When you also look at the harm to society, you'd want even more resources to be spent on motor vehicles versus bikes, skateboards, electric scooters, horses, roller-blades etc.

The other aspect to consider is that most 'bell-end' cyclists are mainly putting themselves at risk whereas 'bell-end' drivers are mainly putting others at risk. I know which crimes that I'd rather have more police resources used for.

So the 27 officers (3 sergeants, 15 constables and 9 PCSO's) (https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/di...) within the Cycle safety team within the Metropolitan Police is a tiny proportion of the 31,075 Police officers and 1464 PCSO's within the Met Police.  So yes I would like to think that the Traffic Unit within the met will be significanly larger than 27 - and quite possibly could be close to 30 or 40 times the size of the Cycle Safety Team.  And that does not include the resources such as ANPR, Speed Cameras etch which are also deployed.  

So yes the Met do deploy far more resources in other more relevant fields.  But lets all try and play the victims and shift the blame

Avatar
Jetmans Dad replied to TriTaxMan | 4 years ago
2 likes
craigstitt wrote:

It is like turning round and saying nothing should be done about people allowing their dogs to s#*t in parks or on the street, because who is that hurting?  Or nothing should be done about people fly tipping, or throwing litter away, that doesn't hurt anyone?  No?

If you break the law and get caught you only have one person to blame.

That's all true. 

But, personally, I would still like to see the police spending more time and resources pursuing burglary and assault than rounding up people who don't clean up after their dogs or throwing litter in the streets. 

Avatar
Sriracha | 4 years ago
0 likes

The argument that police should prioritise their limited resource to give the greatest reduction in harm is if course convenient to cyclists. They would never be policed. However, taking this principle further, the chancellor would logically spend no money on policing at all, for surely it would be better spend on the NHS, effecting an even greater reduction in harm.
Of course, that is not how resources are allocated. Instead they are spread across all areas of society. Including cyclists. A good thing too.

Avatar
burtthebike replied to Sriracha | 4 years ago
1 like
Sriracha wrote:

The argument that police should prioritise their limited resource to give the greatest reduction in harm is if course convenient to cyclists. They would never be policed. However, taking this principle further, the chancellor would logically spend no money on policing at all, for surely it would be better spend on the NHS, effecting an even greater reduction in harm. Of course, that is not how resources are allocated. Instead they are spread across all areas of society. Including cyclists. A good thing too.

Wow!  Analogy stretching at its finest.  With no police there would be anarchy, widespread violence, extortion for scarce supplies like medicines, the roads would be littered with damaged vehicles and dead pedestrians and cyclists, food would be expensive and limited, nobody would pay any tax and as a result the NHS would be totally overwhelmed and broke. 

As others have pointed out, there is a balance, based on the likelihood of harm, which applies to all of society, not just cyclists.

Avatar
ktache | 4 years ago
4 likes

You don't need police on bicycles to be nicking people on bikes, any copper can do it.

Make use of police on bikes to do things that only police on bikes can actually do.  Riding through traffic, nabbing drivers on phones is a very good one.  Undercover operations against the close passing of vulnerable road users is another.

Use them in places that cops in cars find it difficult to move through, with much greater range than walking bobbies can manage.  This is how we use the bicycle, if they had any imagination, that's how they would use the bicycle.

Or do they only use BAME officers to nick BAME offenders?

Charges of institutional racism in the vigorous use of stop and search might go down a bit.

Avatar
srchar | 4 years ago
2 likes

I see drivers watching stuff on their phones all the time when I ride to work. Send a couple of coppers down Green Lanes on bikes and they'd nick at least 20 people on an average day.

Avatar
burtthebike | 4 years ago
5 likes

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists as illegal drivers, given that in collisions between the two, it is much more often the driver's fault.  It is a fair point that some cyclists do break the law, but that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
2 likes
burtthebike wrote:

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists as illegal drivers, given that in collisions between the two, it is much more often the driver's fault.  It is a fair point that some cyclists do break the law, but that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

Perhaps a lot of their time is spent sending out NIPs for cycling with intent to use a shared pathway.

Avatar
Crambie replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
2 likes
burtthebike wrote:

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists as illegal drivers, given that in collisions between the two, it is much more often the driver's fault.  It is a fair point that some cyclists do break the law, but that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

I disagree. I think they both need sorting out, the idiot drivers and cyclists.  If it were up to me I'd go 100% after each on random days, stopping them, fining them and keep doing that until they start to behave.  I know this was to do with the cycle safety team but it needs to be a huge general crackdown on all of them.

Basically saying that it's ok for cyclists to break the law and to ignore it as long as the likelihood of hurting someone is low is absurd. 

The idiot minority on both sides only understand either a strong deterrent or, more likely, enforcement and unless that's happening then the standard of driving and riding will continue to deteriorate. Don't give one lot of idiots a free pass.

 

 

Avatar
burtthebike replied to Crambie | 4 years ago
3 likes
Crambie wrote:
burtthebike wrote:

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists as illegal drivers, given that in collisions between the two, it is much more often the driver's fault.  It is a fair point that some cyclists do break the law, but that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

I disagree. I think they both need sorting out, the idiot drivers and cyclists.  If it were up to me I'd go 100% after each on random days, stopping them, fining them and keep doing that until they start to behave.  I know this was to do with the cycle safety team but it needs to be a huge general crackdown on all of them.

Basically saying that it's ok for cyclists to break the law and to ignore it as long as the likelihood of hurting someone is low is absurd. 

The idiot minority on both sides only understand either a strong deterrent or, more likely, enforcement and unless that's happening then the standard of driving and riding will continue to deteriorate. Don't give one lot of idiots a free pass.

Who kills more people, drivers or cyclists?  The police have a duty to protect the public, and must therefore appropriate resources to match the risk, and drivers pose a risk hundreds of times greater than that of cyclists.  When all the dangerous, inattentive, distracted drivers have been banned, then the police should turn their attention to cyclists, but not before.

BTW, deterrents don't work.  At hangings of pickpockets, there would be people picking pockets.  Enforcement can work, but if you divert resources into catching people who break the law but pose no threat, you've allowed those who do pose a threat to escape.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to Crambie | 4 years ago
4 likes
Crambie wrote:

 

Basically saying that it's ok for cyclists to break the law and to ignore it as long as the likelihood of hurting someone is low is absurd. 

 

I actually find it astonishing that you can be so  out-of-touch as to declare 'absurd' something that  has been standard part of police practice all over the country for pretty much the entire time the police have existed.  The police prioritize.  Have you really not noticed that they don't pursue every kind of offence with equal vigour and that they make choices as to how to use limited resources? 

 

Honestly?  Haven't noticed the statements about, say, not enforcing 20mph limits or not sending officers to RTAs if no-one is injured, etc?  Or not sending detectives to burlgaries, etc?

 

So, no, far from 'absurd' it's completely consistent with how policing has always been.  It's irrational to deploy resources on things that don't involve much cost to society when those resources could be used investigating crimes that carry a much higher cost.

 

Sadly, how it actually works is it involves responding to a political balance-of-power rather than some objective measure of efficient use of resources.  But still I'm gobsmacked that you've never noticed how policing works.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Crambie | 4 years ago
1 like
Crambie wrote:

I disagree. I think they both need sorting out, the idiot drivers and cyclists.  If it were up to me I'd go 100% after each on random days, stopping them, fining them and keep doing that until they start to behave.  I know this was to do with the cycle safety team but it needs to be a huge general crackdown on all of them.

Basically saying that it's ok for cyclists to break the law and to ignore it as long as the likelihood of hurting someone is low is absurd. 

The idiot minority on both sides only understand either a strong deterrent or, more likely, enforcement and unless that's happening then the standard of driving and riding will continue to deteriorate. Don't give one lot of idiots a free pass.

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.  Do you believe cyclists are really 25 times more likely to break the law?

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to brooksby | 4 years ago
2 likes
brooksby wrote:

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.

It's not the whole Met, just the rather small but seemingly oddly named "cycling safety team". So it's shit, but not that shit.

Avatar
brooksby replied to fukawitribe | 4 years ago
3 likes
fukawitribe wrote:
brooksby wrote:

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.

It's not the whole Met, just the rather small but seemingly oddly named "cycling safety team". So it's shit, but not that shit.

We could adopt that as our new national slogan, maybe put it on the flag...? 

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to brooksby | 4 years ago
4 likes
brooksby wrote:
fukawitribe wrote:
brooksby wrote:

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.

It's not the whole Met, just the rather small but seemingly oddly named "cycling safety team". So it's shit, but not that shit.

We could adopt that as our new national slogan, maybe put it on the flag...? 

 4           

In Latin obvs.

Avatar
brooksby replied to fukawitribe | 4 years ago
1 like
fukawitribe wrote:
brooksby wrote:
fukawitribe wrote:
brooksby wrote:

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.

It's not the whole Met, just the rather small but seemingly oddly named "cycling safety team". So it's shit, but not that shit.

We could adopt that as our new national slogan, maybe put it on the flag...? 

 4           

In Latin obvs.

Better ask Jacob 

Avatar
Awavey replied to brooksby | 4 years ago
0 likes
brooksby wrote:

Isn't the point made by the twitterers that 2% of journeys in London are made by bike and yet the Met are saying they spend 50% of their time enforcing laws against cyclists.  Do you believe cyclists are really 25 times more likely to break the law?

No the Met cycle safety team are saying that,which I think is the important distinction people have overlooked when you consider what law breaking a cycle cop is actually capable of dealing with,that it's only 50% of their time dealing with cyclists, is actually a good thing

Avatar
Philh68 replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
4 likes
burtthebike wrote:

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists… that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

This just demonstrates the difference between cities that don’t understand cycling and those that do. Were this happening in Amsterdam or Copenhagen, instead of punishing cyclists they would observe them, work out why they are cycling that way, and change the infrastructure to adapt to the desired use and make it safer.

Road rules are not designed for pedestrians and cyclists, they’re designed around the car so as to prevent their progress from being impeded. Given the right priority, cyclists have no need to break the rules.

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to Philh68 | 4 years ago
0 likes
Philh68 wrote:

Road rules are not designed for pedestrians and cyclists, they’re designed around the car so as to prevent their progress from being impeded.

That's not generally true is it ? There are rules to dictate behaviour - such as those to aid in conflict prevention - which can also be used to help with traffic flow sure, but also those to mandate against dangerous use and to try and protect more vulnerable road users. There are code of conduct combined with rules, such as the Highway Code, which are clearly not solely "designed around the car so as to prevent their progress from being impeded". I don't believe the balance is right, but it's not all one way traffic, so to speak.

Philh68 wrote:

Given the right priority, cyclists have no need to break the rules.

..and yet they will, as now, because apart from anything else they're humans.

Avatar
Awavey replied to Philh68 | 4 years ago
2 likes
Philh68 wrote:
burtthebike wrote:

It does seem odd that the Met cycle safety team spends just as much time pursuing illegal cyclists… that rarely endangers other people, but I can understand why some people, especially pedestrians feel threatened.

Given that this is such a tiny team, it might be hoped that they would spend most of their time actually making cycling safer, not prosecuting cyclists who break the law but endanger no-one.  I realise that this is the same argument used by speeding drivers, but this is the cycle safety team.

This just demonstrates the difference between cities that don’t understand cycling and those that do. Were this happening in Amsterdam or Copenhagen, instead of punishing cyclists they would observe them, work out why they are cycling that way, and change the infrastructure to adapt to the desired use and make it safer.

I'd agree desire lines are the best way to work out city planning issues like this rather than enforcement,but in my view it's not the job of the police to be city planners,that's the councils job

Avatar
Philh68 | 4 years ago
4 likes

No problem Brooksby, it’s just a pet peeve of mine that every time a cyclist is killed the question “were they wearing a helmet” pops up in the local newspaper, as if a crappy styrofoam hat would have prevented it. There’s been four fatalities in my area this year, for all of them the news reports mentioned helmets. The most recent was a high schooler riding to school, hit by a school bus which should have given way at an intersection. “It was not known if he was wearing a helmet”, as if doing so would matter when a bus drives over you. It’s just the worst kind of victim blaming, inferring that what happened was at least partly due to their own negligence.

 

Avatar
brooksby replied to Philh68 | 4 years ago
2 likes
Philh68 wrote:

No problem Brooksby, it’s just a pet peeve of mine that every time a cyclist is killed the question “were they wearing a helmet” pops up in the local newspaper, as if a crappy styrofoam hat would have prevented it. There’s been four fatalities in my area this year, for all of them the news reports mentioned helmets. The most recent was a high schooler riding to school, hit by a school bus which should have given way at an intersection. “It was not known if he was wearing a helmet”, as if doing so would matter when a bus drives over you. It’s just the worst kind of victim blaming, inferring that what happened was at least partly due to their own negligence.

Then I think we may have misunderstood each other, Phil... 

My original post was intended to draw attention to the fact that helmets are compulsory in Oz, so this poor bloke was wearing one, and yet he still crashed and died of his injuries.

So, that helmet didn't help him at all.

And yet, "falling off and hitting something" is one of those sorts of incidents that helmets are argued as protecting against ("Yes, I know a helmet won't save you if you get run over by a bus, but at least it'll save you if you fall off and hit your head on a post").

Except this time it didn't.

No offence intended <hand-shake offered>

Avatar
ktache | 4 years ago
2 likes

I waited all weekend and there was no update on the insanity of the continuing saga surrounding VeloLife.

Avatar
Jetmans Dad replied to ktache | 4 years ago
1 like
ktache wrote:

I waited all weekend and there was no update on the insanity of the continuing saga surrounding VeloLife.

I actually bumped into a couple of riders from that neck of the woods in our local cycle cafe in East Yorkshire over the weekend. They were very vocal in expressing their frustration at the actions of the council and the continued lack of any sensible conclusion to the whole situation. 

Avatar
Philh68 | 4 years ago
1 like

Precisely my point, brooksby.

Pages

Latest Comments